Category: Politics

This morning, I was listening to NPR. During one segment, they discussed the conflicting job creation numbers cited by Mr. Kerry and Mr. Bush as they slog through the last week of vicious campaigning before election day. Mr. Bush claims there have been 1.9 million jobs created on his watch, while Mr. Kerry contends that millions of jobs have been lost in this administration. The NPR interviewer asked an expert which of these figures is correct.

The expert replied basically that both were, depending which set of figures were used and when you start counting. Bush used the household survey — calling a random sample of Americans on the phone and asking if they are working — and begins counting in August of 2003. After all, he says, 9/11 happened and economists’ opinions aside, you can’t blame him for jobs lost because of that. Of course Reuters is kind enough to point out that the 1.9 million jobs also counts jobs expected to be created through February of 2005.

Mr. Kerry, on the other hand, starts counting at the beginning of the Bush Administration. After all, the buck stops there, right? Furthermore, he uses the employment survey — which most economists prefer because it asks companies exactly how many people are on the payroll. It doesn’t count illegal workers or contractors, but there you are.

The NPR interviewer then asked which number voters should be paying attention to. My answer is neither. The number you need to pay attention to is 6.75 million. That is the number: the absolute bare minimum number of jobs that should have been created in the 45 months and counting of the Bush Administration just to keep up with new people entering the workforce. Those 6.75 million people don’t count in the big unemployment number. They can’t collect unemployment benefits because they never had jobs.

If you are one of those “undecided” voters, here is a handy rundown of official positions on various issues. Please keep in mind that sometimes what they say is not necessarily what they mean.

I realize this puts me in a minority, but I am not a big fan of voter initiatives. Some states vote on amendments to the state constitution, but the function is the same: an idea for whatever reason cannot be forced through the state legislature, so a sufficient number of signatures is collected to put the item on the ballot, where ordinary citizens can make it law. Supporters say this is the very heart of the democratic process, giving Joe and Jane Average political power over the representatives they, um, elected to government.

These initiatives always have titles and descriptions that make them sound like good things, if not complete no-brainers. The Initiative to Hug Cute Bunny Rabbits, for example. Washington’s I-884 is described as “concerns dedicating funds designated for educational purposes.” Gee, how can you not vote for dedicating money to schools you heartless oaf?

The problem is that this description, like that of many initiatives, is misleading. This one raises sales taxes, and theoretically earmarks the money raised from this tax for education only for the next two years. Such initiatives are often boiled down to their summary paragraph form from pages of legalese (11 pages in this case) that frankly, nobody wants to read in detail. You just have to take their word for what it says.

This process has also been hijacked by special interests seeking to avoid legislative “interference” in their agenda. There’s big money and big players involved, subverting the noble sounding idea of citizens forcing important ideas into law.

Another reason I don’t like voter initiatives is that they often if not always have unintended consequences. In fact, I’ll go out on a limb and suggest maybe that’s why the legislature couldn’t get the idea passed in the first place. Voters vote themselves lower taxes and therefore there is no money for fixing roads. Voters vote to make certain kinds of animal traps illegal and it is suddenly hard to get rid of nuissance coyotes and raccoons. The highest profile example is California’s “3 strikes” law, passed by voters years ago. The practical result was that people were getting harsh sentences for minor crimes, just because it happened to be the “third strike.” Such laws are also blamed as a factor in current record level prison populations. So now, California is having a ballot initiative to repeal a ballot initiative.

Also, because we don’t vote every month, we end up seeing many of these initiatives all at once. Sometimes, we see them for the first time on Election Day. Florida has 8 to worry about. Washington has 5, California has 16. Your milage may vary, but it might take some time to figure them all out if you don’t like my method of dealing with them.

I will be voting NO on each and every voter initiative on this November’s ballot.

Please accept my apologies for being completely wrong yesterday. I bought into the spin that the debates were fake and didn’t matter — a viewpoint which was strengthened by the inadvertent release of rough drafts of a debate wrap-up by a prominent news source hours before the debate itself. For the record, it is an open secret that news writers often pre-prepare likely news stories (e.g., obituary of public figure battling deadly disease) with room to fill in the details.

The New York Times put it most succinctly: “In the end, it was a real debate….”

It turns out that average Americans think Kerry won, even though NPR this morning proclaimed that it would be days before “public opinion gel[led]” and we know exactly what happened. Um, yeah. Oh, and if you’d like an outside opinion about what was said, The BBC has a nice wrap-up, with a PDF of the transcript available for download.

Many things have been said across the Greater Blogosphere about what was said and what it means. I will leave you with the one most important thing I heard. I know it was important because President Bush said it several times: “[Kerry says] It was the wrong war at the wrong place at the wrong time.” This attempt to hearken back to the “risky tax scheme” meme that Clinton and Gore beat senseless in the ’96 debates backfired. Instead it sounded like he was making his opponent’s point for him. By the third time, all I could think of was “Quick! Don’t think of an elephant!”

Thinking of an elephant, aren’t you? Not me, I’m thinking of the next debate. It will be interesting to hear what these guys have to say about domestic policy.

Yawn. Let’s stop pretending there will be a Presidential Debate tonight, shall we?

Tonight is actually the first in a series of so-called debates, and the topic du jour is foreign policy. There will be a couple more of these before the big day in November. But this isn’t going to be like some of the decisive debates of the past. There will be no decisive I-can’t-believe-he-said-that moment, no clear winner except the man you favored to begin with. Don’t expect any “let me say this about that,” nor any “there you go again.” In fact, we’ll be lucky to get a “fuzzy math!” or a “gridlock!”

First of all, I think most of us are clear on where the candidates stand if we have paid attention.

More importantly, however, this isn’t a real debate. There’s nothing spontaneous being said, minimal interaction between the candidates, no truly independent arbiter, no deep issues, and an audience — required to be undecided and silent — that may as well be painted cardboard. It would be an improvement to let Mr. Bush and Mr. Kerry each run an infomercial instead. What a waste of time and money. If you really must watch, have one of these Bingo cards in hand. Hit reload if you want a better one.

I can only hope my pathetically low expectations will be exceeded.

Here in the United States, the deadline for Voters Registration is rapidly approaching. This is your last chance to register to vote in the November 2 elections. It is vitally important that every concerned citizen register, and then carry through by voting. Do not let yourself be scared by stories of registrations being tossed out in Ohio or expected voting issues in Florida. If you don’t even try to register, none of that matters.

If you need help figuring out how and where to register, kottke.org has a nice page of information and useful links. If that’s too complicated, do a web search for “voters registration [insert your state here].” Rules may be a little complicated if you are a college student living in the dorms, so double check local requirements. If you have any questions about local rules, polling places, or whether you are already registered, add your county name to the search above and find the phone number of the local voters registration board.

Let me refute several common excuses:

I don’t want to be called for jury duty. Do you have a driver’s license? A telephone? Electricity service in your name? Then you may already at risk for being called to jury duty, depending where you live. If it really bothers you that much, bookmark this page of how legally to get out of serving on a jury.

It doesn’t matter how I vote anyway. There’s plenty of room for change in the electoral picture, as this graph shows. And that’s just the headliner. You’ve got a member of Congress to vote on, maybe a Senator, and a slate of State and local issues to vote on. Polls be damned, the voting booth is the one place your opinion really does matter. You may have “just one vote,” but that gets added in with everybody else’s just one vote. Ask your local voting officials or check your local newspaper for a voters guide of candidates and issues. You’ve got a month to study!

With my job schedule, I don’t have time to vote! Working twelve hour shifts, eh? If you seriously doubt you can leave for work a little early and vote on the way in, or get to the polls after work before they close, ask about an absentee ballot. Most states have liberalized their policies for such ballots. In fact, in some states with electronic voting, it has been suggested that absentee ballots at least have a paper trail.

I live on the West Coast. The election is long over by the time I can vote on the way home from work. By my count, Pacific Time Zone represents 78 electoral votes. Add another 7 for Alaska and Hawaii. This election may well be close enough that those 85 electoral votes are pivotal. But again, this attitude discounts the very important Congressional, State, and local issues every voter faces.

In short, if you do not vote, if you do not even bother registering to vote, people like me will have a hard time taking you seriously when you complain about the government, taxes, schools, roads, education, the environment, or the economy. Yeah, your vote impacts all that.

Please note that this post is free of partisan rhetoric. It is none of my business who you vote for, just vote.

Today, I saw for the first time a Bush campaign ad titled “Economic Agenda.” It is viewable on their website, if you have not already seen it. The substance of the ad was broken into convenient, numbered bullet points. If I may, I would like to address the specific issues listed. I promise to do this with a minimum of snark, in an attempt to raise the overall level of political discourse.

1. Lifelong Learning. That sounds great. Really. I am one of those people who would really love to follow the old maxim of “Learn something new every day.” Unfortunately, people who are paid to pay attention to such stuff say there’s no program to go with these words. In fact, a search for “Bush lifelong learning” reveals mostly comments from First Lady and former Librarian Laura Bush. What does lifelong learning mean, anyway? Does it mean continually training for the jobs of the future, whatever they may be? Until we have some idea what we are talking about, there is very little to say.

2. Invest in Education. Another “how can you disagree” sort of statement. Everyone except the most diehard Libertarians agrees that it is important to have adequate investment in education if we are to have workers who can do what needs to be done in the coming decades. And the President actually has something he can brag about in the realm of education, “No Child Left Behind.” Unfortunately, that’s one of those things that sounds better than it has worked out. Now, it has reached the point where high performing schools are finding themselves “Failing” under the federal standard of “better,” and are facing sanctions. It sure feels like the ultimate goal is to make schools ineligible for federal funds. I’ve spoken on education before.

3. New Skills for Better Jobs. That ties in nicely with the “lifelong learning” thing, doesn’t it? Unfortunately, training for a job does not guarantee that you will get a job doing what you have trained to do. What job training does, however, is get people temporarily out of the labor pool, and benefit publicly traded schools such as Corinthian Colleges, ITT, and DeVry. Remember, the official Department of Labor standard for being Unemployed is very, very narrow. I am not saying that there is no point in training for a new job, just that job training programs will not fix the fact that not enough jobs are being created. I have spoken on this far too many times to list them all.

4. Fairer and Simpler Tax Code. Actions speak louder than words. And so far the Bush Administration has said that complicated taxes are just fine (thank you, The Daily Mis-lead). Oh yeah, and he made sure that big SUVs are tax deductible for businesses. That brings us very nicely to his next bullet point….

5. Reduce Foreign Energy Dependance. Drilling holes in the Arctic isn’t going to fix the fact that we use too much oil, and burn too much coal. And frankly, the current administration has not done a whole lot to change that for the better. Clean air rules that were meant to phase out older, more polluting plants have been relaxed. Car milage standards have not been raised to levels that would reduce our need for foreign oil. There’s talk about alternative energy, but what about action? And the time for action is now, since at least one major oil company has announced that they just don’t have as much oil in the ground as they thought they did.

6. Fairer Trade. Another one of those phrases you would have to be some kind of nut-job to disagree with. Even John Kerry thinks fair trade is a good idea. President Bush clearly means “free and fair,” which might be different. Unfortunately, the price of the dollar is being used as a weapon in this quest for free, fair trade. And this has not had a positive effect on the American economy. It will be interesting to see what the two candidates have to say in their debates, and more interesting to see what the assorted columnists and other experts have to say about it.

7. Job Incentives. Um, the economy has lost a net 915,000 jobs during the Bush Administration. If there’s a brilliant idea, in the works, we could sure stand to hear it, maybe even do it. Better yet, let’s do it two years ago, since the administration has missed it’s own job creation targets for the last two years.

8. Comp/Flex Time. It is a bad idea. I have said this until I am blue in the face. It means your boss gets to work you as hard as he wants, pay you nothing extra, and promise to give you some time off someday, at his whim.

9. Strengthen Social Security. It seems like I just talked about this last week.

10. Legal Reform. President Bush talks about ending frivolous lawsuits. But what he means is capping damages. Damage caps would tell big businesses exactly how much money it will cost to break the law, harm people, and pollute the environment we all live in. If you think Big Chemical Co doesn’t dump dangerous carcinogens in your backyard because they are such good people, go ahead and lobby for damage caps. If you suspect that they follow the law because it’s cheaper than lawsuits, then caps are a bad idea. Of particular note, Vice-President Cheney’s former company, Halliburton, stands to gain quite a bit should damage caps be enacted.

11. Tax Relief. Again, that tired bit of political framing. Tax “relief” implies that taxes are onerous, that President Bush wants to rescue you from the IRS. He’s had 3 years to work on this. Are you better off? Have you benefitted from the rise in Estate Tax exemption from half a million dollars to a million and a half? Maybe you have benefitted from some of the other tax breaks? Don’t bet on it.

In closing, I love this chart of commonly used words at the two conventions. It sure looks like the Republicans think John Kerry is more important than Health Care.

When I was in school, way back in the Reagan Administration, we were taught that a Conservative was somebody who thought things were just fine as they were (or, as they used to be in the “good old days”) and that a Liberal was someone who thought there were things that could change for the better. That being the case, I would like to know where this idea of “Liberals Hate America” comes from.

Liberals do not hate America, but they think there are things that can be better. Liberals know that such issues as drug abuse, poverty, and homelessness cannot be fixed with platitudes and blaming the victim. They don’t think most people “were asking for it” when they became an addict, or a crime victim, or mentally ill, or a teenage single mother.

Liberals know that good jobs are important for everyone. They also know that a “good job” includes making enough money to live on, being as safe as possible at work, and certain expected benefits — including insurance and retirement assistance. Liberals believe that two people who do the same job — and do it just as well — should be paid the same. It shouldn’t matter what race, sex, nationality, or religion either of them is.

Liberals also understand that as important as continuing economic prosperity is, we only have one environment. We cannot live without it, and therefore we must be good stewards of it. They do not believe that the vast majority of industries will consistently do what is right for the good of the environment or for the good of mankind without rules that make them.

Liberals do not hate the Government, but they do not blindly follow the President just because he’s the President. They’re not into the whole “my country right or wrong” thing, but rather “Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country.”

Liberals agree that Terrorism Is Bad. But they are not entirely sure how checking for home buyers’ names on lists of terrorists or pawing through commuter’s briefcases or absurd prosecutions help prevent terrorism. You might as well claim that terrorists were scared away by John Ashcroft’s uplifting song of praise, “Let the Eagles Soar.”

Which brings me to one final point. Liberals are not all a bunch of anti-Christian hedonists. They recognize that the same First Amendment that gives Christians of all sects the right to practice their religion more or less as they please — as long as they do not infringe on anybody else’s rights — is the same First Amendment that protects the rights of Jews, and Muslims, and Buddhists, and Hindus, and Sufis, and Zoroastrians, and yes, Wiccans. If you don’t like it, join the separatists. But don’t come crying to me if religious rule under Christians is almost as brutal as Muslim Sharia law.

Just maybe Liberals aren’t as evil as some people would have you believe.

The following is the draft of a letter I will be sending to the editorial staff of Alternet.

To Whom It May Concern:

As a regular reader of Alternet, I find myself insulted by the blatant sexist subtext of Lakshmi Chaudhry’s essay, “What John Kerry Needs: The Estrogen Factor.” I am not sure what I find more outrageous: the insinuation that the woman who pasted her head over Mrs. Edward’s picture is in any way “typical” of female voters; the description of women as “those creatures with breasts”; or pointing out that “the fact that Edwards ‘looks seriously hot’ while he’s making his pitch doesn’t hurt either.” Even John Edwards should be insulted by this message of “He’s more than just a pretty face.”

If your point is that Senator Edwards is able to effectively deliver a message of importance to female voters, please make that point and move on. Frankly, this article smacks of “Oh yes! Kerry should run with Edwards because he’s so dreeeeeamy!”

Don’t get me wrong, being charismatic is a huge asset to someone running for office. Dennis Kucinich can attest to this. He has great ideas but, well, looks so unpresidential. Senator Kerry would be wise to get some of Kucinich’s ideas on board, and perhaps even get the man himself on board helping make policy. However, if the Presidential race comes down to looks and charisma, perhaps we should completely sell out and consider Brad Pitt. Or maybe Harrison Ford — he has at least played the President in a movie. Don’t you think that would spice up the Vice-Presidential debates this fall?

If Senator Kerry wants women’s votes this fall, the key is not his Vice-Presidential candidate, but the issues. Talk to us about things that matter to us. Strangely enough, most of the things the female half of our population cares about effect the rest of the country too.

For example, everybody needs healthcare. And at this point, I think we can all agree it is expensive. Furthermore, I think anybody who has honestly looked at the issues understands that nothing President Bush has done has improved things.

How about food safety? We all eat food, don’t we? And choosy moms would like to know they aren’t feeding their kids mad-cow burgers, or otherwise dangerous food.

Don’t forget education. Education is a critical issue not only to moms, but to anybody who has employees, and anybody who wants to make sure America has a stable, productive economy in the future.

Oh, and don’t forget the price of oil and gas. Frankly, it is vitally important to everyone. It’s important to everyone who uses a vehicle to get to work or school. It’s important to small businesses. It’s important to big businesses. It’s important to the economy. It’s important to global security.

This is to say nothing of civil liberties (which we all have), the environment (which we all live in), inflation (it’s back!), and even the 40 hour work week (which still might be in danger).

John Edwards may well be the right man to be John Kerry’s running mate. However, it that is the case it is because of his stance on the issues, not “The Estrogen Factor.”

Bear with me. It seems the rest of the world has just recently discovered that electronic voting may not save democracy from oblivion after all, that sending personal information overseas may not be a good idea, that Congress may inadvertently make most networks illegal to prevent illegal file sharing (putting Time-Warner in the uncomfortable position of either defending their media copyrights or defending AIM and AOL chatrooms), and just because President Bush can dish out the Bible verses doesn’t mean he can take it.

But today, I’d like to talk to you about the patronizing attitude the current administration has about darn near everything. It has gone far beyond for-us-or-against-us my-way-or-the-highway attitudes about everything from Social Security to condoms. Outside input is neither solicited nor desired. Public statements have stopped just short of “Now, now, these are the advisors your elected President has selected and they know best.”

Would you like examples? We can go back to Dick Cheney’s claim that he does not have to release information about those Energy Task Force meetings because of executive privilege. If you’d like something more recent, try Condi Rice refusing to publicly testify under oath about September 11. This last instance is particularly hypocritical in light of her appearance on the news TV show 60 Minutes.

The Administration is even telling Republicans what they should say about the environment on the campaign trail. And it would seem they don’t like it. After all, they are elected officials too.

If you are unfamiliar with the ideas of George Lakoff, now is as good a time as any to become acquainted. One of his central theories is that conservatives in general work on a “strict father” model. The Boss/Dad/President is in charge, he knows best, you should do what he says. You wouldn’t dream of questioning items on Dad’s credit card bill; nor should you question your leaders who say we need to spend money on the special important project of the day. If you would like to learn more about this controversial fellow and his ideas, here is his official faculty page at UC Berkeley, assorted articles and interviews, and his Amazonography.

The “fat lady” is not singing.

Not yet anyway.

But that sound you hear is her accompanist’s overture.

John Kerry had a fabulous “Super Tuesday,” winning 9 of the 10 races. His closest opponent, John Edwards, has scheduled a 4 PM press conference at which he is almost universally expected to drop out of the race. Kerry is expected to be the Democratic Presidential Candidate. He is starting to talk about how he will pick the Vice Presidential Candidate. The international press is reporting that Kerry has won the candidacy.

But here’s the thing. Kerry hasn’t actually got the necessary delegates yet. As of this writing, he only has 1361 of the 2162 he needs to be officially anointed. It is true that the remaining candidates have less than 100 delegates combined. However, it is also true that before yesterday’s contests, Howard Dean still had more delegates than John Edwards. Dean, you probably recall, dropped out of the race weeks ago. At least he keeps his blog current. And speaking of Dean, guess who won the one Primary that Kerry did not take yesterday? Yes, that would be Howard Dean.

In fact, by my read of CNN’s handy chart of delegates, Kerry isn’t even quite the winner if all the delegates earned by candidates no longer in the race are released to support Kerry. Edwards and Dean are still in a position to force some of their opinions into the Party Platform.

This also means that Bush will have to actually spend time worrying about campaigning, spending from his vast war-chest, as opposed to “looking presidential” in the Rose Garden. The TV blitz starts right about….. now.

Kerry had better be ready to talk about job creation, offshoring, the weak dollar, Social Security, and schools.

Oh, and he’d better be ready to go on Jon Stewart’s “Daily Show,” “Where more Americans get their news than probably should.” Maybe even consider a blog.